A new survey reinforces so long-term trends, but shows some surprising reversals that anyone interested in scholarly communication should note. Continue reading
In a follow-up to the six mistakes sales reps make, here’s a list of six mistakes library staff can make. It’s a sobering comparison. Continue reading
In my previous posting, I focused on what I believe to be dim prospects for the Encyclopedia Britannica as it transforms from a set of printed volumes into a networked online information portal. My skepticism stems from the fact that although the EB claims to offer “the breadth of the world’s knowledge,” its coverage of … Continue reading
Who can judge quality or utility? How are library acquisition practices optimized? Continuing an earlier post, the tensions are now exposed by budgetary limitations, and the repercussions of shifting away from traditional acquisition practices will be felt for years to come. Continue reading
A recent analysis suggests some worrisome trends for librarianship. Continue reading
Patron-driven acquisition — what does it mean? This FAQ deals with how PDA approaches books, journals, and libraries. Continue reading
Are librarians making the same mistake railroads made — forgetting their purpose to remain tied to their physical heritage? Continue reading
At Cornell University, you can rent a bicycle from the circulation desk. Should the library be peddling a different brand? Continue reading
How did “scholarly communication” become equated with open access advocacy? Is its misuse ultimately self-defeating? Continue reading
It appears that the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) will be holding another “IN” meeting next month over my strenuous objections as a long-standing member of the society. My objections are not concerning SSP holding a Fall meeting – indeed, the autumn is my favorite time of the year to repair to a fine club, properly provisioned with brandy and cigars, to discuss the affairs of the society with other learned gentlemen. ather, my concerns are regarding the topic of the meeting. “IN,” I am told, stands for INnovation, INspiration, and INteraction. I am wont to think of a more unholy trinity of concepts and think “INfernal” is more apropos! Continue reading